[Par]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

First...they are cooperating, as Bunk points out. Unless your idea of cooperating is handing them a blank cheque? Or pursuing the utterly awful CalgaryNEXT?

Second...Calgary is still a larger corporate hub than anywhere in this country not named Toronto. Indisputable. And I if Calgary moves, very like you see Rogers sue for money to be returned to them for losing a market from their TV deal. The netting out of losing Calgary and gaining a mediocre US market is a loss. Having only one Alberta market ignores that the other Alberta market makes more money and can have more corporate support. Edmonton moving was a more real threat to take seriously, even if it still really wasn't (as we can see, there's still no arena in Seattle).

Third...Montreal is disingenuous why exactly? It used to be the corporate capital of Canada at one point in time. If it had the same tax structure as Alberta, it would probably be number two and not Calgary.

Fourth...The city relies on the Flames, but the Flames owners have only one better market to move to, Toronto 2, and it will cost them dearly to do so, all to be second fiddle anyway (and possibly fourth in the whole market after the Raps and Jays). The cost of the library is debatable, but the Flames don't have a better place to have a hockey team than here, unless someone is vacating Montreal or New York or Boston etc...

Fifth....well if your argument is "no hope of any economic return", why support an arena investment when those have been proven in multiple studies to have little to no economic return? Oh and as has to be reminded, all for the privilege of paying 30-50% more to see the exact same product.

This will get done, it'll be in Vic Park, the city will contribute land and infrastructure, and we'll get 21 Garth Brooks shows to celebrate.

The points 2 and 4 are bang on, there is no more money in the US for tv deals(especially the NHL), for tv related revenue for the NHL is in Canada and point 4 is pretty accurate.